MOSA RFC Definitions, Format, Ratification, and Maintenance Processes
This RFC outlines how subsequent MOSA RFCs should be written. It defines the ratification process, how changes to a ratified RFC are to be handled, and other administrative procedures for RFC proposing and management.
The definitions and usage of certain conformance terms shall follow the definitions set forth in the IETF's RFC-2119.
Officially ratified MOSA RFCs MUST be written in XML format, in compliance with the latest published version of the MOSA RFC XSD file. While NOT NECESSARY, it is highly RECOMMENDED that proposed RFCs be written in compliance with this XSD. Alternative formats
during the proposal stage MAY include HTML, RTF, PDF, and plain text.
RFCs SHALL be numbered in a sequential increasing order, prepended with MOSA-RFC-.
The call for a ratification vote MUST be initiated by a MOSA member organization, undertaken on MOSA's mailing list. Other MOSA member organizations then MAY vote for or against the proposed RFC on the mailing list. It is RECOMMENDED that organizations
voting against the RFC include constructive comments over the disputed areas of the RFC. Voting SHALL continue until all member organizations have indicated their voting position, or abstention from voting. A proposed RFC MUST reach a majority acceptance vote
of all member organizations to be ratified. Abstention votes SHALL be considered as being against an RFC's acceptance, for purposes of determining majority acceptance.
Upon ratification, a copy of the XML definition of the ratified version of the RFC MUST be placed under a source control system. Further updates to the RFC SHALL be considered a proposal, subject to the ratification process. Upon ratification, the original
RFC copy SHALL be updated with the accepted change. The RFC's change summary section SHALL be updated with the contact name of the member organization who proposed the update, along with the date of ratification.